Essential Instructional Practices in Early Literacy

PREKINDERGARTEN
ge l n
Essential Instructional
Practices in Early Literacy
General Education Leadership Network
a MAISA collaborative
By the Early Literacy Task Force, a subcommittee of the Michigan
Association of Intermediate School Administrators (MAISA) General
Education Leadership Network (GELN), which represents Michigan’s 56
Intermediate School Districts. For a full list of representatives, please see
the back page.
INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES
This document is intended to be read in
concert with Essential Instructional
Practices in Early Literacy,
Kindergarten - Grade 3. There is
important overlap and continuity in these
two documents.
You may not excerpt from this document in
published form, print or digital, without written
permission from the MAISA GELN Early Literacy Task Force. This document may be posted or
reproduced only in its entirety (six pages).
To reference this document:
Michigan Association of Intermediate School
Administrators General Education Leadership
Network Early Literacy Task Force (2016). Essential instructional practices in early literacy: Prekindergarten. Lansing, MI: Authors.
Page 1 | Essential Literacy Practices - Prekindergarten
Purpose
The purpose of this document is to increase Michigan’s capacity
to improve children’s literacy by identifying a small set of researchsupported literacy instructional practices that could be a focus of
professional development throughout the state. The focus of the
document is on classroom practices, rather than on school- or
systems-level practices (which will be addressed in a future document).
The document focuses on prekindergarten, as literacy knowledge
and skills developed in the preschool years predict later literacy
achievement.1 Prekindergarten education has the potential to improve
“reading-by-third-grade” outcomes. Early childhood programs can
also help to address disparities in literacy achievement. Research
suggests that each of the ten practices in this document can have a
positive impact on literacy development. We believe that the use of
these practices in every classroom every day could make a measurable
positive difference in the State’s literacy achievement. They should be
viewed, as in practice guides in medicine, as presenting a minimum
‘standard of care’ for Michigan’s children.
The practices listed can be used within a variety
of overall approaches to literacy instruction and
within many different structures of the day;
the document does not specify one particular
program or approach to literacy instruction. We
limited the list to ten practices; there are other
literacy instructional practices that may be worthy
of attention. In addition, new literacy research
could alter or add to the instructional practices
recommended here. For these reasons, choosing
to enact the practices on this list would leave
considerable agency and choice for individual
districts, schools, centers, and teachers.
Each one of these ten recommended instructional
practices should occur every day regardless
of the specific program or framework being
used in the classroom. The recommended
instructional practices are to occur throughout
the day, largely integrated into opportunities
for learning in all other areas, not in an isolated
block identified as “English Language Arts”
or “Literacy.” Literacy instruction should not
dominate the prekindergarten day; in the long
term, that approach is counterproductive. Later
academic achievement is predicted not only by
literacy knowledge and skill, but by mathematics
learning, knowledge of the natural and social
world, and certain aspects of social, emotional,
and physical development.2 Finally, it is important
to read this document in relation to the State of
Michigan’s expectations for literacy development
in prekindergarten,3 which should garner careful
attention in all Michigan prekindergarten
programs and be one focus in observing classroom
practice and children’s development. The endnotes
provide references to some research studies
that support the practices listed. An exception
is instructional practice #9, for which we were
unable to locate closely supporting studies with
preschool-age children.
Page 2 | Essential Literacy Practices - Prekindergarten
1. Intentional use of literacy artifacts in dramatic play and throughout the classroom4
Reading and writing materials are not only
present but used throughout the classroom
environment.
• Within daily opportunities for dramatic play, the teacher
provides, models use of, and encourages children’s
engagement with appropriate literacy artifacts, such as:
 order pads, menus, and placemats for a pizza parlor
 traffic signs, maps, blueprints, and building-related books in the block/construction area
 envelopes, stationery, postcards, stamps, and actual
mail for a post office
 waiting room reading material, a schedule, and
prescription pads for a doctor’s office
 a copy of books, such as The Little Red Hen, labeled
puppets and objects from the story
• Within centers and other areas of the classroom, children
are encouraged to interact with reading and writing
materials, such as:
books related to construction or building in the block
or construction area
simple recipes for making snacks
labels that indicate where items go
children’s names, for example on cubbies and sign-in
sheets, which may vary over time (e.g., first with photos,
then, later, without photos)
writing materials in each area of the classroom, for
drawing and writing about objects being observed in
the science area
(See also instructional practice #8.)
2. Read aloud with reference to print5
Daily read alouds include verbal and non-verbal
strategies for drawing children’s attention to
print, such as:
• running finger under words
• noting specific features of print and letters
(e.g., “that is the letter D like Deondre’s name”)
• asking children where to start reading
• counting words
• pointing out print within pictures
3. Interactive read aloud with a comprehension and
vocabulary focus6
The teacher reads aloud age-appropriate
books and other materials, print or digital,
including sets of texts that are thematically and
conceptually related and texts that are read
multiple times, with:
• higher-order discussion among children and teacher
before, during, and after reading
• child-friendly explanations of words within the text
• revisiting of words after reading using tools such as
movement, props, video, photo, examples, and non-examples, and engaging children in saying the words
aloud
• using the words at other points in the day and over
time
• teaching of clusters of words related to those in the
text, such as vocabulary related to the garden or gardening
4. Play with sounds inside words7
Children are supported to develop phonological
awareness, or conscious awareness of sounds
within language, and especially, a type of
phonological awareness called phonemic
awareness, which involves the ability to segment
and blend individual phonemes within words,
through various activities, such as:
• listening to and creating variations on books with
rhyming or alliteration
• singing certain songs
(e.g., “Willoughby, Walloughby…”; “Down by the
Bay”; “The Name Game”; “Apples and Bananas”)
• sorting pictures and objects by a sound or sounds in
their name
• games and transitions that feature play with sounds
(e.g., alliteration games, a transition that asks all children whose name begins with the mmm sound to move
to the next activity)
• “robot talk” or the like (e.g., the teacher has a puppet
say the sounds “fffff ” “iiiii” “shhhh” and children
say fish)
5. Brief, clear, explicit instruction8 in letter names, the
sound(s) associated with the letters, and how letters
are shaped and formed9
Instruction that has been shown to be effective in
fostering development of letter-sound knowledge
is supported by tools such as:
• a high-quality alphabet chart
• cards with children’s names
• other key words to associate with letter-sounds
(e.g., d is for dinosaur)
• alphabet books with appropriate key words
• references throughout the day (e.g., “That sign says the store is open. The first letter is o. It makes the “oh” sound: ooopen.”)
Research suggests that we should set a benchmark of
children naming 18 upper case and 15 lower case letters
by the end of pre-K10 and should teach letter-sound associations, rather than letter names or sounds alone.11
6. Interactions around writing12
Adults engage in deliberate interactions with children around writing. Opportunities for children to write
their name, informational, narrative, and other texts that are personally meaningful to them are at the
heart of writing experiences. These deliberate interactions around writing include the use of interactive
writing and scaffolded writing techniques.
•
Interactive writing involves children in contributing to a piece of writing led by the teacher. With the teacher’s
support, children determine the message, count the words, stretch words, listen for sounds within words, think about
letters that represent those sounds, and write some of the letters. The teacher uses the interactive writing as an
opportunity for instruction, for example regarding the directionality of writing, purposes for writing, and specific
letter-sound relationships.
•
Scaffolded writing involves the individual child in generating a message the child would like to write. The message is
negotiated and repeated with the child until it is internalized. The teacher draws one line for each word in the message using a highlighter or pen. The child writes one “word” per line, where “word” might be a scribble, letter-like
forms, random letter strings, one or a few letters within the word, or all sounds within the word, depending on the
child’s writing ability. The teacher and the child read and reread the message.
Page 3 | Essential Literacy Practices - Prekindergarten
7.Extended conversation13
Adults engage in interactions with children that
regularly include:
• responding to and initiating conversations with children, with repeated turns back and forth on the same
topic
• encouraging talk among children through the selective
use of open-ended questions, commenting on what
children are doing, offering prompts (e.g., “Try asking
your friend how you can help”), and scaffolding higher-order discussion, particularly during content-area
learning
• engaging in talk, including narration and explanation,
within dramatic play experiences and content-area
learning, including intentional vocabulary-building
efforts
• extending children’s language (e.g., The child says,
“Fuzzy”; the adult says, “Yes, that peach feels fuzzy.
What else do you notice about it?”)
• stories of past events and discussion of future events
8. Provision of abundant reading material in the
classroom14
The classroom includes:
• a wide range of books and other texts, print and dig-
ital, including information books, poetry, and storybooks accessible to children
• books and other materials connected to children’s
interests and that reflect children’s backgrounds and
cultural experiences, including class- and child-made
books
• recorded books
• books children can borrow to bring home and/or
access digitally at home
• comfortable places in which to look at books, frequently visited by the teacher(s) and by adult volunteers
recruited to the classroom
9. Ongoing observation and assessment of children’s
language and literacy development that informs their
education
The teacher engages in:
• observation and assessment that is guided by

an understanding of language and literacy development

the Early Childhood Standards of Quality for Prekindergarten (2013) and, if applicable,

the Head Start Early Learning Outcomes Framework (2015)
• observation that occurs in multiple contexts, including
play
• use of assessment tools that are considered appropriate for prekindergarten contexts
• use of information from observations and assessment
tools to plan instruction and interactions with children
10. Collaboration with families in promoting literacy15
Families engage in language and literacy interactions with their children that can be drawn upon and
extended in prekindergarten. Prekindergarten educators help families add to their repertoire of strategies
for promoting literacy at home, including:
• incorporating literacy-promoting strategies into everyday activities such as cooking, communicating with friends and
family, and traveling in the bus or car
• reading aloud to their children and discussing the text
• encouraging literacy milestones (e.g., pretend reading, which some parents mistakenly believe is “cheating” but is actually
a desired activity in literacy development)
• speaking with children in their home/most comfortable language, whether or not that language is English16
• providing literacy-supporting resources, such as:
 books from the classroom that children can borrow or keep
 children’s magazines
 information about judicious, adult-supported use of educational television and applications that can, with guidance,
support literacy development
 announcements about local events
 passes to local museums (for example, through www.michiganactivitypass.info)
Page 4 | Essential Literacy Practices - Prekindergarten
(Endnotes)
1
2
Lonigan, C. J., Schatschneider, C., & Westberg, L., with the National Early
Literacy Panel. (2008). Identification of children’s skills and abilities linked
to later outcomes in reading, writing, and spelling. In Developing early literacy:
Report of the National Early Literacy Panel (pp. 55-106). Louisville, KY: National
Center for Family Literacy.
Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C.,
Klebanov, P., . . . Japel, C. (2007). School readiness and later achievement.
Developmental Psychology, 43, 1428–1446; Grissmer, D., Grimm, K. J., Aiyer, S.
M., Murrah, W. M., & Steele, J. S. (2010). Fine motor skills and early comprehension of the world: Two new school readiness indicators. Developmental
Psychology, 46, 1008-1017; Rhoades, B. L., Warren, H. K., Domitrovich, C.E.,
& Greenberg, M. T. (2011). Examining the link between preschool social–
emotional competence and first grade academic achievement: The role of
attention skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26, 182-191; Romano, E.,
Babchishin, L., Pagani, L. S., & Kohen, D. (2010). School readiness and later
achievement: Replication and extension using a nationwide Canadian survey.
Developmental Psychology, 46, 995-1007.
3
Michigan State Board of Education. (2005, revised 2013). Early Childhood
Standards of Quality for Prekindergarten. Lansing, MI: Author.
4
For example, Neuman, S. B., & Roskos, K. (1992). Literacy objects as cultural
tools: Effects on children’s literacy behaviors in play. Reading Research Quarterly,
27, 202-225; Roskos, K. A., Christie, J. F., Widman, S., & Holding, A. (2010).
Three decades in: Priming for meta-analysis in play-literacy research. Journal
of Early Childhood Literacy, 10, 55-96; Gerde, H. K., Bingham, B. E., & Pendergast, M. L. (2015). Reliability and validity of the Writing Resources and
Interactions in Teaching Environments (WRITE) for preschool classrooms.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 31, 34-46. Guo, Y., Justice, L. M., Kaderavek, J. N., & McGinty, A. (2012). The literacy environment of preschool
classrooms: Contributions to children’s emergent literacy growth. Journal of
Research in Reading, 35, 308-327.
5
6
7
8
For example, Justice, L. M., & Ezell, H. K. (2002). Use of storybook reading
to increase print awareness in at-risk children. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 17-29; Justice, L. M., McGinty, A. S., Piasta, S. B.,
Kaderavek, J. N., & Fan, X. (2010). Print-focused read-alouds in preschool
classrooms: Intervention effectiveness and moderators of child outcomes.
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 41, 504-520; Mol, S. E., Bus, A.
G., & de Jong, M. T. (2009). Interactive book reading in early education: A
tool to stimulate print knowledge as well as oral language. Review of Educational Research, 79, 979-1007.
For example, Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2007). Increasing young
low-income children’s oral vocabulary repertoires through rich and focused
instruction. Elementary School Journal, 107, 251–271; Lonigan, C. J., Shanahan, T., & Cunningham, A., with the National Early Literacy Panel. (2008).
Impact of shared-reading interventions on young children’s early literacy
skills. In Developing early literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel (pp. 153166). Louisville, KY: National Center for Family Literacy; Marulis, L. M., &
Neuman, S. B. (2013). How vocabulary interventions affect young children
at risk: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 6,
223-262.; Sénéchal, M. (1997). The differential effect of storybook reading
on preschoolers’ acquisition of expressive and receptive vocabulary. Journal
of Child Language, 24, 123-138; Pollard-Durodola, S. D., Gonzalez, J. E., Simmons, D. C., Kwok, O., Taylor, A. B., Davis, M. J., ... & Simmons, L. (2011).
The effects of an intensive shared book-reading intervention for preschool
children at risk for vocabulary delay. Exceptional Children, 77, 161-183; Gonzalez, J. E., Pollard-Durodola, S., Simmons, D. C., Taylor, A. B., Davis, M. J.,
Kim, M., & Simmons, L. (2010). Developing low-income preschoolers’ social
studies and science vocabulary knowledge through content-focused shared
book reading. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4, 25-52.
For example, Brennan, F., & Ireson, J. (1997). Training phonological awareness: A study to evaluate the effects of a program of metalinguistic games
in kindergarten. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9, 241–263;
Bus, A. G., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1999). Phonological awareness and
early reading: A meta-analysis of experimental training studies. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 91, 403-414. Suggate, S. P. (2016). A meta-analysis of
the long-term effects of phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, and reading
comprehension interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49, 77-96.
Explicit instruction involves telling children what you want them to know,
rather than expecting that they will infer this information. For example,
explicit instruction about the letter L might include (although not necessarily
Page 5 | Essential Literacy Practices - Prekindergarten
all at once) the following: “This [pointing] is the letter called ell. Ell stands
for the lll sound. Latoya’s name starts with the lll sound: LLLatoya. Lion also
starts with the lll sound: llllion. You can make ell with a straight line down
and a short line across, like this [demonstrating], or you can make ell with
just a straight line down, like this [demonstrating].”
9
For example, Lonigan, C. J., Schatschneider, C., & Westberg, L., with the
National Early Literacy Panel. (2008). Impact of code-focused interventions
on young children’s early literacy skills. In Developing early literacy: Report of the
National Early Literacy Panel (pp. 107-152). Louisville, KY: National Center
for Family Literacy; Piasta, S. B., & Wagner, R. K. (2010). Developing early
literacy skills: A meta-analysis of alphabet learning and instruction. Reading
Research Quarterly, 45, 8–38.
10 Piasta, S. B., Petscher, Y., & Justice, L. M. (2012). How many letters should
preschoolers in public programs know? The diagnostic efficiency of various
preschool letter-naming benchmarks for predicting first-grade literacy
achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 945-958.
11 Piasta, S. B., Purpura, D. J., & Wagner, R. K. (2010). Fostering alphabet
knowledge development: A comparison of two instructional approaches.
Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23, 607–626; Piasta, S. B., & Wagner, R. K.
(2010). Learning letter names and sounds: Effects of instruction, letter type,
and phonological processing skill. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 105,
324–344.
12 For example, Bodrova, E., & Leong, D. J. (1998). Scaffolding emergent
writing in the zone of proximal development. Literacy Teaching and Learning,
3, 1–18; Craig, S. A. (2003). The effects of an adapted interactive writing
intervention on kindergarten children’s phonological awareness, spelling,
and early reading development. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 438-440;
Gregory, K. T. M. (2000). The influence of the scaffolded writing technique on the
literacy development of kindergarten children (Order No. 9971918). Available from
Dissertations & Theses @ CIC Institutions; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses
A&I; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text; ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Global. (304610034). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/
docview/304610034?accountid=14667; Hall, A. H., Simpson, A., Guo, Y.,
& Wang, S. (2015). Examining the effects of preschool writing instruction on
emergent literacy skills: Asystematic review of the literature. Literacy Research
and Instruction, 54, 115-134; Hall, A. H., Toland, M. D., Grisham-Brown, J.,
& Graham, S. (2014). Exploring interactive writing as an effective practice
for increasing Head Start students’ alphabet knowledge skills. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 42, 423–430.
13 For example, Dickinson, D. K., & Porche, M. V. (2011). Relation between
language experiences in preschool classrooms and children’s kindergarten
and fourth-grade language and reading abilities. Child Development, 82, 14678624; French, L. (2004). Science as the center of a coherent, integrated
early childhood curriculum. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 138-149;
Neuman, S. B., Newman, E. H., & Dwyer, J. (2011). Educational effects of
a vocabulary intervention on preschoolers’ word knowledge and conceptual
development: A cluster-randomized trial. Reading Research Quarterly, 46, 249272. Snow, C. E., Barnes, W. S., Chandler, J., Goodman, I. F., & Hemphill,
L. (1991). Unfulfilled expectations: Home and school influences on literacy. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press 14 For example, Neuman, S. B. (1999). Books make a difference: A study of
access to literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 286-311; Guo, Y., Justice, L.
M., Kaderavek, J. N., & McGinty, A. (2012). The literacy environment of
preschool classrooms: Contributions to children’s emergent literacy growth.
Journal of Research in Reading, 35, 308 – 327. McGill-Franzen, A., Allington,
R. L., Yokoi, L., & Brooks, G. (1999). Putting books in the classroom seems
necessary but not sufficient. The Journal of Educational Research, 93, 67-74. 15 For example, Roberts, K. L. (2013). Comprehension strategy instruction
during parent-child shared reading: An intervention study. Literacy Research
and Instruction, 52, 106–129. Sénéchal, M., & Young, L. (2008). The effect of
family literacy interventions on children’s acquisition of reading from kindergarten to grade 3: A meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 78,
880-907; van Steensel, R., McElvany, N., Kurvers, J., & Herppich, S. (2011).
How effective are family literacy programs? Results of a meta-analysis. Review
of Educational Research, 81, 69-96.
16 August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.) (2006). Developing literacy in second-language
learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Process for Development and Review
This document was developed by the Early Literacy Task Force, a subcommittee of the Michigan Association of
Intermediate School Administrators (MAISA) General Education Leadership Network (GELN), which represents
Michigan’s 56 Intermediate School Districts. The Task Force included representatives from the following
organizations, although their participation does not necessarily indicate endorsement by the organization they
represent:
Bay-Arenac Intermediate School District
Eaton Regional Educational Service Agency
Genesee Intermediate School District
Huron Intermediate School District
Ingham Intermediate School District
Iosco Regional Educational Service Agency
Jackson County Intermediate School District
Kalamazoo Public Schools
Lenawee Intermediate School District
Lewis Cass Intermediate School District
Livingston Educational Service Agency
Macomb Intermediate School District
Mecosta-Osceola Intermediate School District
Michigan Association of Administrators of Special Education
Michigan Association of Computer Users in Learning
Michigan Association of Intermediate School Administrators
MAISA Early Childhood Administrators Network
MAISA English Language Arts Leaders Network
Michigan Department of Education
Michigan Elementary and Middle School Principals Association
Michigan Reading Association
Michigan State University
Monroe County Intermediate School District
Muskegon Area Intermediate School District
Oakland Schools
Ottawa Area Intermediate School District
Reading Now Network
Regional Education Media Center Association of Michigan
Saint Clair County Regional Educational Service Agency
Saint Joseph County Intermediate School District
Southwest Michigan Reading Council
University of Michigan
Washtenaw Intermediate School District
Wayne County Regional Educational Service Agency
Feedback on drafts of the document was elicited from other stakeholders, resulting in a number of revisions to the document.
ge l n
General Education Leadership Network
a MAISA collaborative
Essential Instructional Practices in Early Literacy
For more information and additional resources, please visit www.migeln.org.
3.18.16